RyanairGuru wrote:

2h30m drive between Launceston and Hobart there is no reason not to treat the state as one market for a long haul flight.

Obzerva wrote:

Tasmanians won’t drive over 2 hours to Hobart for an international flight, when they can just connect through MEL out of LST/DPO/BWT.

Some would, just as some drive would from NTL to SYD, from MCY or OOL to BNE, and from from HLZ to AKL, despite each of these cities having their own airports. Ultimately, the time spent in airports is consistently voted as the most stressful part of a journey - AKL would offer international - international transfers from HBA (within one terminal), as opposed to MEL or SYD, which might be more attractive for Northern Tasmanians. This group might also be attracted to NZ's wider destination offering in the Pacific Islands, potentially cheaper fares to the Americas, unique in-flight product offerings (like the Skycouch), bigger and more comfortable jets for their whole journey (instead of part on a turboprop), as well as the ability to earn and use VA points.

DavidByrne wrote:

As an addendum re HBA - I was there last in January and found that accommodation costs were astronomical because of a serious capacity shortfall. Tasmania needs to address that issue if it wants to attract international visitors.

RyanairGuru wrote:

Any long haul flight into AYQ is a none starter. The Voyages properties have a year-round occupancy rate of near enough 100%. There is no point flying in more guests when the resort cannot accommodate the numbers visiting already.

First, who said anything about attracting new visitors? There are large existing numbers of visitors that these flights could be used to steal passengers away from, who currently use QF or other established players (read the figures in post 125 - for Tasmania, about 70,000 annually from Asia (for a SIN - HBA flight) and 55,000 annually from New Zealand, the United States and Canada (for an AKL - HBA flight), and for Ayers Rock, about 40,000 annually from Asia (for a SIN - AYQ flight) and 80,000 annually from New Zealand, the United States and Canada (for an AKL - AYQ flight)) . In any event, international visitors to Central Australia grew 4.2% last year, while those to Tasmania grew 13% in the same period, so growth is being facilitated

Cheers,

C.

Qantas16 wrote:

eamondzhang wrote:

DavidByrne wrote:

HBA has had wide body service in the past. Back in the 1980s I flew HBA-AKL on QF on a 762, returning a fortnight later AKL-MEL-HBA (also on a 762) after QF canned the nonstop flight. That flight was also canned in pretty short order. And of course NZ operated CHC-HBA for many years with a 737, preceded by a bizarre arrangement where AN and TN each operated fortnightly services on CHC-HBA with a 727-200, but masquerading as a QF flight (QF393 IIRC) because the Federal government insisted that international flights were the sole preserve of Qantas. Customs facilities were available for all these services - can't imagine that wouldn't be available again if required.

I just had a check on HBA's Apron chart: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip ... 01-140.pdf

The biggest plane the apron seems to be able to receive is B763 at 1A, which is almost extinct from SE Asia/Australia. This also involves blocking both spot 1 and 2.

As such I don't currently believe that they can receive any A330/777/787 service due to fuselage length and wingspan.

Cheers
Michael

I'm 95% sure I've heard stories of QF flying 747's to HBA when they were first introduced on test/training flights. Either way, a 747 will be in HBA ~12months from now on a QF Antarctica flight

http://www.antarcticaflights.com.au/Fli ... ember-2018

Qantas were running 742s on the Melbourne to Hobart route during the Pilot dispute all those years ago, also Qantas have operated the 747 on a couple of charters to HBA over the years since, I vaguely remember even 744 Wunala visited one time. But yes they will also have the Antarctica flights coming

planemanofnz wrote:

First, who said anything about attracting new visitors? There are large existing numbers of visitors that these flights could be used to steal passengers away from

But almost none of those visitors solely visit Uluru. The number of international tourists who visit Uluru (or Tasmania for that matter) who don't during the same trip also go to Sydney or one of the other major capitals is tiny.

RyanairGuru wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

First, who said anything about attracting new visitors? There are large existing numbers of visitors that these flights could be used to steal passengers away from

But almost none of those visitors solely visit Uluru. The number of international tourists who visit Uluru (or Tasmania for that matter) who don't during the same trip also go to Sydney or one of the other major capitals is tiny.

Do you have any sources or statistics to verify this?

International visitors to the Northern Territory spend, on average, 8 nights there, while for Tasmania, that figure is 16 nights. Such extended stays demonstrate that these regions are significant destinations in their own right. For many visitors, SYD would of course be incorporated into their journey because they have to go through SYD - there are no direct flights.

A traveler from SIN to AYQ or from AKL to HBA would immediately be drawn to a non-stop flight - a stop in SYD almost doubles the journey for both routes.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

First, who said anything about attracting new visitors? There are large existing numbers of visitors that these flights could be used to steal passengers away from

But almost none of those visitors solely visit Uluru. The number of international tourists who visit Uluru (or Tasmania for that matter) who don't during the same trip also go to Sydney or one of the other major capitals is tiny.

Do you have any sources or statistics to verify this?

International visitors to the Northern Territory spend, on average, 8 nights there, while for Tasmania, that figure is 16 nights. Such extended stays demonstrate that these regions are significant destinations in their own right. For many visitors, SYD would of course be incorporated into their journey because they have to go through SYD - there are no direct flights.

A traveler from SIN to AYQ or from AKL to HBA would immediately be drawn to a non-stop flight - a stop in SYD almost doubles the journey for both routes.

Cheers,

C.

Are you arguing that visitors would fly in, see Ayers Rock and then fly out again? Based on the total number of Asian visitor stat? Hmm I see absolutely no correlation between your stat (which includes alot of people not coming from anywhere close to SIN) and demand for a nonstop between SIN-AYQ.
Sure you can stimulate demand with a nonstop, but since presently the demand between SIN-AYQ is counted on one hands fingers it feels a bit difficult to argue for the viability of the route...

Is there a correlation between average length of a stay and demand for a route? The average stay in Australia is 34 nights. That number includes a lot (VFR staying alot longer than tourists for example) and is based on information supplied voluntarily.
What it fail to show is potential between two airports or that a particular location is a destination in itself (Prague one of the most visited cities and definitely a destination in itself sees the average visitor spend 4.5 nights and should by that metric be a market of little importance).

My belief is that any new nonstop route would start by looking at O/D. I don't have the stats for AKL-HBA, but seeing those stats would say alot more about route viability than total visitor numbers to Tasmania.

MillwallSean wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

But almost none of those visitors solely visit Uluru. The number of international tourists who visit Uluru (or Tasmania for that matter) who don't during the same trip also go to Sydney or one of the other major capitals is tiny.

Do you have any sources or statistics to verify this?

International visitors to the Northern Territory spend, on average, 8 nights there, while for Tasmania, that figure is 16 nights. Such extended stays demonstrate that these regions are significant destinations in their own right. For many visitors, SYD would of course be incorporated into their journey because they have to go through SYD - there are no direct flights.

A traveler from SIN to AYQ or from AKL to HBA would immediately be drawn to a non-stop flight - a stop in SYD almost doubles the journey for both routes.

Cheers,

C.

Are you arguing that visitors would fly in, see Ayers Rock and then fly out again? Based on the total number of Asian visitor stat? Hmm I see absolutely no correlation between your stat (which includes alot of people not coming from anywhere close to SIN) and demand for a nonstop between SIN-AYQ.
Sure you can stimulate demand with a nonstop, but since presently the demand between SIN-AYQ is counted on one hands fingers it feels a bit difficult to argue for the viability of the route...

Is there a correlation between average length of a stay and demand for a route? The average stay in Australia is 34 nights. That number includes a lot (VFR staying alot longer than tourists for example) and is based on information supplied voluntarily.
What it fail to show is potential between two airports or that a particular location is a destination in itself (Prague one of the most visited cities and definitely a destination in itself sees the average visitor spend 4.5 nights and should by that metric be a market of little importance).

My belief is that any new nonstop route would start by looking at O/D. I don't have the stats for AKL-HBA, but seeing those stats would say alot more about route viability than total visitor numbers to Tasmania.

Fair enough - probably no market, you're right. Nevertheless, fun to hypothesize.

Cheers,

C.

Just a quick question, is gate 10 at Melbourne T2 closed? I was checking their international departures page and gate 10 is not listed anywhere.

QF28 is currently diverting to MEL

QF29 wrote:

QF28 is currently diverting to MEL

Southerly winds hitting SYD.

EK413

EK413 wrote:

QF29 wrote:

QF28 is currently diverting to MEL

Southerly winds hitting SYD.

EK413

Is this really the reason?

Police blitz on taxi drivers refusing short fares at Melbourne Airport - a big problem for those who live in or have to travel to surrounding suburbs (and these can include some not so close suburbs as well). Didn't realise it was a $396 fine for a taxi driver to refuse a fare once hailed!

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/taxi- ... ywryo.html

qf2220 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

There is an Icelandair 752 that has just departed AKL heading to Australia. While I'm not 100% sure I believe it is heading to HBA. Flight number is FI1404

https://www.flightradar24.com/ICE1404/f22c019

What is it doing in this part of the world?

It's an Abercrombe & Kent charter.

https://www.abercrombiekent.com/pageflip/2017/ak-pj-atw-gk-2017/index.html

decry wrote:

EK413 wrote:

QF29 wrote:

QF28 is currently diverting to MEL

Southerly winds hitting SYD.

EK413

Is this really the reason?

Sydney had strong winds forecast and the QF28 therefore had to divert possibly due to low fuel.

EK413

melpax wrote:

Police blitz on taxi drivers refusing short fares at Melbourne Airport - a big problem for those who live in or have to travel to surrounding suburbs (and these can include some not so close suburbs as well). Didn't realise it was a $396 fine for a taxi driver to refuse a fare once hailed!

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/taxi- ... ywryo.html

I have a little bit of sympathy for the drivers - if you have waited for ~90minutes (or more) in the holding bay and then get a short fare you are losing money. In Sydney there is a policy whereby if the cabs can get back to the holding bay within 22 minutes of being released to the pick up rank they can go back to the front of the queue. The only catch is that 22 minutes is really tight - because it's measured from the front of the holding bay - so there are at least 3 or 4 minutes (more if luggage is involved) until you have passengers in your cab and are leaving the rank. To get to the destination, take payment, get the passengers out and get back within less than 18 minutes means that the destination needs to be really really close.

Before I get the plethora of the standard 'if they don't like it they should find a new job' comments - I'm not a cab driver, never have been, don't know any cab drivers and I fully appreciate that working a rank is the luck of the draw. I just have sympathy for the economics of being a driver - which on average are very poor. The money to be made in the cab business was (pre uber) always at the licence plate and payment levels and not with the poor saps working a 12 hour turn (with the inherent unsociable hours) with guaranteed expenses (the fees for each 12 hour shift paid to the bailor of the cab) and non-guaranteed returns (short fares after waiting an age on a rank). Post uber I don't know that anyone is making money - except maybe the tyre companies.

This is getting onto a different tangent now and not related to CIV Av, but I don't see why Cab drivers shouldn't be on salary. I presume they're technically subcontracted out? Ethically poor business model imo. Uber not great either but offer much better service so if I have to use a cab they get my money.

Gate 10 at Melbourne is definitely open. It is situated on the north western (now wait for this!) between gates 11 & 15. I think an Irishman must have decided on the gate designations!!

luftaom wrote:

melpax wrote:

Police blitz on taxi drivers refusing short fares at Melbourne Airport - a big problem for those who live in or have to travel to surrounding suburbs (and these can include some not so close suburbs as well). Didn't realise it was a $396 fine for a taxi driver to refuse a fare once hailed!

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/taxi- ... ywryo.html

I have a little bit of sympathy for the drivers - if you have waited for ~90minutes (or more) in the holding bay and then get a short fare you are losing money. In Sydney there is a policy whereby if the cabs can get back to the holding bay within 22 minutes of being released to the pick up rank they can go back to the front of the queue. The only catch is that 22 minutes is really tight - because it's measured from the front of the holding bay - so there are at least 3 or 4 minutes (more if luggage is involved) until you have passengers in your cab and are leaving the rank. To get to the destination, take payment, get the passengers out and get back within less than 18 minutes means that the destination needs to be really really close.

Before I get the plethora of the standard 'if they don't like it they should find a new job' comments - I'm not a cab driver, never have been, don't know any cab drivers and I fully appreciate that working a rank is the luck of the draw. I just have sympathy for the economics of being a driver - which on average are very poor. The money to be made in the cab business was (pre uber) always at the licence plate and payment levels and not with the poor saps working a 12 hour turn (with the inherent unsociable hours) with guaranteed expenses (the fees for each 12 hour shift paid to the bailor of the cab) and non-guaranteed returns (short fares after waiting an age on a rank). Post uber I don't know that anyone is making money - except maybe the tyre companies.

Thee used to be an "unofficial policy" that if you were a local to the airport you could simply jump in a cab upstairs from departures as someone else was getting out, you just told the attendant that you were only going to Tullamarine/Airport West, etc and they would let it slide, used to do it for years.
No longer being a local, I'm told by a colleague who does live local to MEL that they stopped letting that happen about a year ago.

luftaom wrote:

melpax wrote:

Police blitz on taxi drivers refusing short fares at Melbourne Airport - a big problem for those who live in or have to travel to surrounding suburbs (and these can include some not so close suburbs as well). Didn't realise it was a $396 fine for a taxi driver to refuse a fare once hailed!

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/taxi- ... ywryo.html

I have a little bit of sympathy for the drivers - if you have waited for ~90minutes (or more) in the holding bay and then get a short fare you are losing money. In Sydney there is a policy whereby if the cabs can get back to the holding bay within 22 minutes of being released to the pick up rank they can go back to the front of the queue. The only catch is that 22 minutes is really tight - because it's measured from the front of the holding bay - so there are at least 3 or 4 minutes (more if luggage is involved) until you have passengers in your cab and are leaving the rank. To get to the destination, take payment, get the passengers out and get back within less than 18 minutes means that the destination needs to be really really close.

Before I get the plethora of the standard 'if they don't like it they should find a new job' comments - I'm not a cab driver, never have been, don't know any cab drivers and I fully appreciate that working a rank is the luck of the draw. I just have sympathy for the economics of being a driver - which on average are very poor. The money to be made in the cab business was (pre uber) always at the licence plate and payment levels and not with the poor saps working a 12 hour turn (with the inherent unsociable hours) with guaranteed expenses (the fees for each 12 hour shift paid to the bailor of the cab) and non-guaranteed returns (short fares after waiting an age on a rank). Post uber I don't know that anyone is making money - except maybe the tyre companies.

I don’t know how it works, but I’m a sure there is a similar process in Melbourne. Taxi drivers normally ask if you are going beyond Essendon, as that seems to form some sort of perimiter but not sure on specifics.

Is Qantas giving a hint on their next aircraft type with this loan amount?

Qantas raising A$350 million in loan, allows switching aircraft types used as collateral

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-qantas-fundraising/qantas-raising-a350-million-in-loan-allows-switching-aircraft-types-used-as-collateral-idUSKBN1CF0BY

AsiaTravel wrote:

Is Qantas giving a hint on their next aircraft type with this loan amount?

Qantas raising A$350 million in loan, allows switching aircraft types used as collateral

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-qantas-fundraising/qantas-raising-a350-million-in-loan-allows-switching-aircraft-types-used-as-collateral-idUSKBN1CF0BY

I suspect that it's just a syndicated loan agreement with some (very limited) flexibility in the aircraft in the security net. Typically aircraft finance facilities are secured by a single or a couple of very similar aircraft. What this sounds like is a mechanism for aircraft to be added or subtracted from the security net, no doubt involving the security trustee's consent and a independent valuation and assessment of the aircraft moving in or out of the security net. I suspect the facility agreement will have a hardwired mechanism to allow for the interest spread to move up and down depending on the value of the collateral i.e. the more collateral the lower the interest (and vv).

Speaking of aircraft today QF will officially be handed over the "keys" of -ZNA 10am Seattle time.

EK413

qf789 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Speaking of aircraft today QF will officially be handed over the "keys" of -ZNA 10am Seattle time.

EK413

Are you sure, I heard something different?

I heard 10th of October 10am Seattle local exchange of title.

EK413

Obzerva wrote:

Thee used to be an "unofficial policy" that if you were a local to the airport you could simply jump in a cab upstairs from departures as someone else was getting out, you just told the attendant that you were only going to Tullamarine/Airport West, etc and they would let it slide, used to do it for years.
No longer being a local, I'm told by a colleague who does live local to MEL that they stopped letting that happen about a year ago.

Apparently the airport put a stop to it as they wanted their 'cut' of the fare. Drivers can be fined for accepting fares on the departures level apparently.

It looks like QANTAS are using their asset pool as collateral. This could be two edged sword. I suspect the terms of the contract will be based around the liquidity of assets rather than collateral on a asset, where the financier takes on the (relatively low) risk.

This deal could unencumber aircraft in the Jetstar portfolio, allowing those assets to be leveraged for growth of the business (i.e. Purchase of new A320NEO on finance).

This is a smart financing move by QANTAS, but could bite it if the market tanks.

Its all about exposure, so I suspect QANTAS would have properly assessed the risk.

qf789 wrote:

I have heard a rumour that an airline servicing PER in considering upgrading equipment

That's a broad clue.

MH 738-333
TG 788-359/772/77W
SQ 333/772-388/77W/359
NZ 789-772
SA 343-346
CX 333-359/77W

Could be anyone what do EY use? 332 to 77W/789?

You use upgrade rather than upgauge so something newer but a similar size?!

ZK-NBT wrote:

qf789 wrote:

I have heard a rumour that an airline servicing PER in considering upgrading equipment

That's a broad clue.

MH 738-333
TG 788-359/772/77W
SQ 333/772-388/77W/359
NZ 789-772
SA 343-346
CX 333-359/77W

Could be anyone what do EY use? 332 to 77W/789?

You use upgrade rather than upgauge so something newer but a similar size?!

I remember hearing that EK wanted to go twice daily 388, this would be an upgrade of note

ZK-NBT wrote:

qf789 wrote:

I have heard a rumour that an airline servicing PER in considering upgrading equipment

That's a broad clue.

MH 738-333
TG 788-359/772/77W
SQ 333/772-388/77W/359
NZ 789-772
SA 343-346
CX 333-359/77W

Could be anyone what do EY use? 332 to 77W/789?

You use upgrade rather than upgauge so something newer but a similar size?!

CX is already going 359 at the end of this month.

EK will drop BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL as part of their revised partnership with QF. QF to add frequencies and will upguage some services between MEL/BNE-AKL.

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... ip-update/

ZK-NBT wrote:

qf789 wrote:

SA 343-346

Could be anyone what do EY use? 332 to 77W/789?!

EY has been a 789 for a while now. SAA also already uses A346s every now and then.

qf744fan wrote:

I remember hearing that EK wanted to go twice daily 388, this would be an upgrade of note

EK has already operated twice daily A380 to PER, between August 2016 and March of this year.

getluv wrote:

EK will drop BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL as part of their revised partnership with QF. QF to add frequencies and will upguage some services between MEL/BNE-AKL.

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... ip-update/

Interesting news. Press release states connect to London Perth. Wonder if we’ll see seasonal Perth extended? Be good to see the schedule.

The only airline i can see upgrading out of PER is EY to 777 or AirAsia from DPS to A330, but that would likely be seasonal.

The only other long shot would be QR but i dont think there is enough premium demand to fill the 388.

qf789 wrote:

BAeRJ100 wrote:

qf744fan wrote:

I remember hearing that EK wanted to go twice daily 388, this would be an upgrade of note

EK has already operated twice daily A380 to PER, between August 2016 and March of this year.

Actually EK axed the second A388 service to PER in Oct 16, it then returned for Dec/Jan and then went back to 777 in Feb

Congratulations to me for being so in the loop at my local . Thanks for the update guys.

smi0006 wrote:

getluv wrote:

EK will drop BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL as part of their revised partnership with QF. QF to add frequencies and will upguage some services between MEL/BNE-AKL.

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... ip-update/

Interesting news. Press release states connect to London Perth. Wonder if we’ll see seasonal Perth extended? Be good to see the schedule.

It seems more targetted at people connecting at Melbourne but that creates a 2 stop flight.

QF Changes to MEL

QF153 MEL 07:45 - 13:20 AKL 738
QF159 MEL 10:45 - 16:20 AKL A332
QF155 MEL 18:15 - 23:50 AKL 738
QF151 MEL 23:35 - 05:50+1 AKL A332

Also on the topic of A330's QF will now have even less A330's on domestic sectors - I also heard from someone at VA that they are aiming to remove all A330's from domestic opps within 2 years.

smi0006 wrote:

getluv wrote:

EK will drop BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL as part of their revised partnership with QF. QF to add frequencies and will upguage some services between MEL/BNE-AKL.

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... ip-update/

Interesting news. Press release states connect to London Perth. Wonder if we’ll see seasonal Perth extended? Be good to see the schedule.

Fairfax is saying "Emirates will begin services directly between Dubai and New Zealand bypassing Melbourne and Brisbane...", which kinda reads as dropping a flight to both MEL & BNE.

Simply dropping the NZ tags and establishing new direct NZ routes makes more sense.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/qantas-and-emirates-compete-for-kiwis-with-extra-flights-20171011-gyykd7.html

Video of ZNA being assembled and painted
https://www.facebook.com/Qantas/videos/ ... 631692686/

qf789 wrote:

I have heard a rumour that an airline servicing PER in considering upgrading equipment

That would time in with the rumoured upgrade to a new business class for a subset of the 737 fleet, similar to Jetblue’s Mint product

Assuming the a330s would launch SYD/BNE to HKG and mystery Chinese city

Thanks to Ausbt we now have a table showing all the QF changes for BNE/SYD/MEL-AKL:
https://www.ausbt.com.au/here-is-qantas ... o-auckland

BNE gains 2 extra 737 flights each week and 1 flight upgraded to A330
MEL sees a new A330 flight each day and 1 flight upgraded to the A330 6 days per week

qf789 wrote:

I have heard a rumour that an airline servicing PER in considering upgrading equipment

EY B77W upgauge

EK413

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-emir ... SKBN1CG06K

Interesting commentary from Reuters re QF/EK

I am surprised that QF hasn't put on more flights e.g. AKL-PER year round, or AKL-ADL (or maybe AKL-HBA even) as part of the approval process with the ACCC. These changes create a 3.7% volume decrease. The original approval required QF and EK to maintain pre competition capacity on TT - which at the time seemed to be the only really 'onerous' condition on the deal.

qf789 wrote:

Dan23 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

EY B77W upgauge

EK413

Not CX swapping the A330 for A350?

No that has already being announced

The rumour I have heard is EY is considering upgrading from 789 to 77W

Hmm, okay that will only leave QF upgauge their daily QF71 PER-SIN service to A330 equipment year round?

EK413

Probably too early to know for sure, but any idea how the Socceroos will get to SAP?

EK413 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Dan23 wrote:

Not CX swapping the A330 for A350?

No that has already being announced

The rumour I have heard is EY is considering upgrading from 789 to 77W

Hmm, okay that will only leave QF upgauge their daily QF71 PER-SIN service to A330 equipment year round?

EK413

I could see SQ bring the A350 to PER, or even combine two of the four daily flights into one, operated with a 773 or 77W. The 772 fleet continues to decline in numbers.